So the “underlying principle” does not involve next year’s election?
Why can’t Democrats bring their case before the electorate next year instead?
The answer must be because it is not 100% about principle. Circumventing the electoral results of 2016 and attempting to short-circuit next year’s election means impeachment must also be about removing an obstacle to power.
Must it?
If the president is unfit–which he is–and has failed to uphold the constitition and commited impeachable offenses–which he almost certainly has–its Congress’ duty by law to remove him. Its their job to do so.
Painting this as a power grab by the Dems is banal. Of course the Dems want political power. Its poltics what do you expect?
Its telling that GOP supporters are so cynical and swimming in lies like fish in water they cannot conceive of the idea that decisions can be made for the greater good of the country.
The dems are taking a big risk by impeaching him and % wise prob better off just letting him keep stumbling around.
Maybe its time the GOP shows their constituents they are capable of this for a change. Not holding my breath there.
If you had roaches in your house, would you wait until you got your tax return to get rid of them? I’m just saying.
The Dems could wait until next year but then the whining would be why did they wait until we got XYZ into the election. Why did they blah blah blah.
I don’t know how any could cap so hard for a man who is clearly unstable, threatens national security and can’t even do his one job, protect the mutherfucking Constitution.
I know folks wouldn’t be asking why the GOP isn’t waiting had this been Carter or Obama.
Of course not, but we don’t elect roaches (successfully resisting obvious joke potential here).
The big problem this presents to the nation is that Democrats are willing to undo/invalidate/ignore the votes of American citizens who elected Trump in 2016. And after all, Trump will stand for reelection in a year.
Of course Democrats will gin up “it’s on principle” and “he’s obviously [insert traitor/crook/incompetent here]” because it makes things awkward if they don’t.
Democrats probably won’t see it, but many will and all Trump supporters will see it for what it is, an attempt to undo one election and head off the next. Trump supporters are happy with Trump’s record and they do not share the Democrats’ concern.
So if a president is elected they are infallible no matter what they do because otherwise if Congress did their job as a check and balance that would be undermining the voters? And every time a president abuses power and commits an impeachable offense we should wait until the next election for the voters decide?
First off that is not how the system of checks and balances work. You just take the assumption that all this is about is undermining poor little old Trump and the wishes of the voters. You are making gross assumptions about everybody’s motivation that is not in your party. You ignore all the facts and said so yourself that you search multiple pages on a Google search until you find something you agree with.
He has openly admitted to abusing his power clear as day. This is why it is impossible to have any debate b
with many Trump supporters. You can’t take facts just as they are presented. You must insert assumptions of people’s motivation as a vast conspiracy of people coordinating and working against you into every single topic. You seem to have lost touch with all reality. When will your party stop being a victim and actually stand for some principle?
Because that’s what it’s about, obviously.
This is nonsense. Dems will have to work overtime and then some to prove to American voters.
You don’t seem to understand the difference between “any reason to impeach” and “high crimes and misdemeanors,” but that’s not a surprise because you and the rest of the Dems do not like Trump. It’s personal, it’s visceral for you, it’s TDS and you’re blind to your own motives.
And it’s already falling apart for the Dems.
Friday, the Washington Post gave Schiff’s claims that “we have not spoken directly with the whistleblower. We would like to,” the worst possible rating: Four Pinocchios.
Yeah you are ignoring the obvious:
“China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened to China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine,”
—“I have a lot of options on China, but if they don’t do what we want, we have tremendous power”
If he was so concerned about corruption he wouldn’t be solely focused on one person who happens to be his main political opponent. This is called “quid pro quo” and is a high crime and misdemeanor. He with held aid and tried to cover it up. Plenty of evidence for that.
As much as you love to rag on Nancy Pelosi, she delayed bringing anything up for an impeachment inquiry until it was blatantly obvious. So far you’ve provided no evidence of Schiff writing the complaint for the whistleblower or coordinating with Nancy Pelosi. No evidence whatsoever for your assumptions…none.
This is the trashy newsite you are posting from. Let’s let that sink in…
One of us is def ignoring the obvious, but only one of us has TDS.
Good grief. Virtually every recent president has faced resolutions for impeachment introduced. Reagan for Iran-Contra. HW for the Gulf War. Clinton for obstruction. W for various wars. Obama for illegal drone programs and a host of other offenses.
What makes Trump’s unique is that articles of impeachment haven’t been introduced. A vote to authorize investigation hasn’t been taken. This is all simply political theater at this point - it’s raised far more passion in the left’s base than any candidate they have put forward and have enabled said candidates to notably increase the amount of money they have been able to raise.
OMG! Fake News?
The question from the town hall is on video from C-Span and embedded in the article. The story about Schiff was broken by the NY Times and linked (and quoted extensively) in the article posted.
Fundraising for multiple GOP pacs is through the roof, no question.
Pelosi has so far refused to hold a chamber vote over official impeachment inquiry, so yeah pure theater so far.
It’s still sad, though. I was actually in Lafayette Park (across from WH) when Nixon resigned in 1974, and believe me people there were deliriously happy. That happiness lasted for about two weeks as we all patted ourselves on the back over it.
However, the US quickly went into a mild psychic depression over it, a funk that lasted the rest of the decade. Impeachment is no joke, and while we avoided something similar in 1998 that is no guarantee it can’t happen again.
There should be a damn good reason for it. Negating an election and heading off the next isn’t good enough imo. If Pelosi follows through and if articles are introduced, then we’re cooking with gas.
Until then it’s just a matter of the Democrats flirting with the idea that voters will reward them next year for making the rest of the US as unhappy as they are.
Re-read. “Trashy”. Or did you miss the discussion on what CNN likes to focus on?
And how about asking a foreign power for dirt on a political opponent? Is that good enough reason? Answer the question mr. Horseman.
This is really important. Democrats are campaigning on “elect me because I hate Trump more than anybody else” and “elect me because I have the best likelihood of beating Trump”. The day after the election what do they have? Business as usual? Bernie and Yang are the only people who really are proposing any kind of platform and discussing real issues.
In the past few days, we’ve seen calls to impeach Trump (and lock him in solitary confinement so that he can’t ‘interfere’ in the next election), a report that House Democrats want to impeach Pence along with Trump, that they want to get Pompeo to refuse a subpoena so they can arrest him and ‘drag him out’ and that they want to impeach and remove every Trump cabinet member.
Now, I don’t expect that every official is a historian or believe they actually will accomplish the above but want to have people pause and think of what accomplishing the above would actually do to the country (and the entire world).
Re-read (or perhaps have somebody re-read for you). Sources are C-Span and the NY Times. Both are cited clearly and quoted (or embedded) in full context.
That is your characterization of what happened. It’s based on TDS, and I say that because you are unable to see any other reasonable characterization.
It must be an attempt to extract dirt on a political opponent, it cannot be an attempt to examine Ukraine involvement in the upcoming 2020 election in the context of what happened in 2016.
So, being the literal incarnate of Hitler and killing, literally EVERYBODY at least five times isn’t enough for you? I don’t care if you and your ‘evidence’ say it didn’t happen, I want to beleeeeeiiiiive that it did. I know a Muslim transgender woman of color with autism who wants to see him removed. Why do I need to tolerate your Islamophobic, homophobic, transphobic, anti-austismite views when all you need to do is give me your money and do what I want to make me happy?
And those would probably be among the happier Dems these days. 